Why don't people get both sides of the story and get all the facts before making a decision? (men, woman)

[JBAinTexas]

Why do people assume without getting all the facts, all sides, before making a decision or an opinion?

Why do people just gravitate toward a biased decision without hearing what others have to say?

[ItsRick24]

Call me cynical, but in an argument between two parties, my take is that there's Person A's side of the story, Person B's side of the story, and then there's the truth. I'm guilty of having left out information in past arguments; I'm sure others have and continue to.
You just have to weigh things out and use your better judgment.

[ClaraC]

Originally Posted by JBAinTexas

Why do people assume without getting all the facts, all sides, before making a decision or an opinion?

Why do people just gravitate toward a biased decision without hearing what others have to say?

Unless it's really important to understand the situation, there's no real need for a thorough investigation.

For example if you go into a McDonalds and you see a couple where the woman is acting snappish and shrill, and the guy is acting kind of embarrassed, I'd think wow she looks kind of crazy I'll go sit on the other side of the restaurant.

Who really knows what that's all about and I don't need to know to make my own decision to avoid them.

If someone I like and trust says "wow have you met the new teacher? She's fabulous, much better than the teacher she replaced". Ok, good enough for me, I don't have any kids going into that grade. I don't need to hear another side to form an opinion that I'll probably like the new teacher if I met her.

[emm74]

You see that on threads here on CD a lot, and I find it interesting. Sometimes a person will post a story and everyone will automatically believe their version although of course the other person isn't posting here and hasn't had the opportunity to give their own version of what happened.

But oddly enough, sometimes a person will post something and pretty much everyone on the thread will go into attack mode against them, tell them that they must be lying and the opposite of what they are saying must be true.

I've never really been able to distinguish what makes one of these situations happen vs. the other - meaning that I am not sure why in some cases, people just assume the original poster is being completely truthful and there is no other side of the story and sometimes, everyone (or at least the majority) seems to think the original poster is making things up.

It's odd.

[ocnjgirl]

I hate this too. The one that bugs me most on the forum is someone posts an article, then without fail people will post "I didn't read the article, but here's my opinion of it".

[ClaraC]

Originally Posted by emm74

You see that on threads here on CD a lot, and I find it interesting. Sometimes a person will post a story and everyone will automatically believe their version although of course the other person isn't posting here and hasn't had the opportunity to give their own version of what happened.

But oddly enough, sometimes a person will post something and pretty much everyone on the thread will go into attack mode against them, tell them that they must be lying and the opposite of what they are saying must be true.

I've never really been able to distinguish what makes one of these situations happen vs. the other - meaning that I am not sure why in some cases, people just assume the original poster is being completely truthful and there is no other side of the story and sometimes, everyone (or at least the majority) seems to think the original poster is making things up.

It's odd.

There's a study, right there! Hmm. What makes people react with empathy vs. what makes them attack with seemingly little reason to do so.

Care to guess? My guess is the clearer they are with the information, the more people are likely to be empathetic.

The more they leave up to the imagination of the reader, the more likely they're going to be judged harshly. Because people's imaginations can be REALLY negative.

[emm74]

Originally Posted by ClaraC

There's a study, right there! Hmm. What makes people react with empathy vs. what makes them attack with seemingly little reason to do so.

Care to guess? My guess is the clearer they are with the information, the more people are likely to be empathetic.

The more they leave up to the imagination of the reader, the more likely they're going to be judged harshly. Because people's imaginations can be REALLY negative.

That could be part of it, but it really is strange sometimes. Of course I cannot think of a specific thread right now, but there have been times where right from the start, almost all of the responding posts include negative assumptions even when there was (IMO) a reasonable amount of information to start with.

I think it's natural to get a little frustrated if someone says something like "Gee, my neighbor is so mean and I have no idea why" and the 80 posts into a thread, you get the rest of the story about them having outdoor pool parties with strobe lights at 3 am and a live band. But that's not even the kind of thing I'm thinking of.

[jaminhealth]

This happens all the time here, we hear one side of everyone's story. Hard to really give any educated help. So when I give an opinion, I give it with open thoughts about the other person. Have to do that. Unless people know one another very personally and then they get the other side(s).

[jaynaydee]

When one person bad mouths another, and expects you to hate that person as well just based off what they tell you about that person. I run into that all the time with women. I'm sure men do this too I just haven't experienced it with them.
I think it stems from jealousy.
I'm of the ilk that I don't care how you feel about them. I have to meet them and form my own opinion.

[silibran]

Because we are human beings with flaws. And because we are emotional. And because we are lazy.